Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
gunsmoke
Trad climber
Clackamas, Oregon
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:04pm PT
|
No, I don't think a 2.5% tax rate on upper income earners, taxes on tanning salons, and a few other places will be a big deal. Especially when balanced with the bill's benefits.
Still not answering the question.
By the way, you can't really peg an exact percent (like "2.5") on the new taxes because of the complex way the taxes are applied.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:09pm PT
|
I thought I did Gunsmoke. What did I not answer? Could you please repeat the question?
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:10pm PT
|
This is the best day since Obama got elected for conservatives to reap what they have sown. I didn't vote for him, but I'm glad he won.
The republicans have been taken over by right wing wackos. It came to bite them in the ass when Obama got elected. A liberal black dude is president, LOL, how they must despise that. Now the right wing wackos ARE the republican congress and they didn't want to work with the Dems. The dems said screw it, they're not going to work with us we'll just pass what we want, and the repubs helped convince the really liberal Dems to go along with it with their opposition.
The good thing is the health care bill is not "socialism" or a "govt. takeover" it's a little left of center plan that still provides health care by private insurance and private hospitals.
Now instead of providing poor people with last ditch healthcare in ERs that the rest of us pay for, they have to contribute and get preventative care which makes the system much more efficient.
I'm really enjoying the conservatives and tea baggers pulling their hair out and freaking out, it's karmic payback for all their lies and fearmongering.
They now have to think the Dems will get ousted in the fall elections because the same 46% of people who hate Obama didn't want the health bill, when this doesn't happen get ready for another freak out!
Tea baggers screaming racial and gay insults and spitting on people. A congressman screaming baby killer. Karmic payback, oh yeah!
|
|
gunsmoke
Trad climber
Clackamas, Oregon
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:11pm PT
|
Why will it be too late to do anything [context: repeal it]? Will that Congress be more cowardly than this one? Will the executive be unwilling to modify this program, make it better? I don't understand why something that took decades to pass, can never ever be tweaked again.
The point of the original author is that this move by the Federal government or regulate, fine, and tax one-sixth of the economy is not reversible. Of course it is tweakable.
|
|
gunsmoke
Trad climber
Clackamas, Oregon
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:14pm PT
|
I thought I did Gunsmoke. What did I not answer? Could you please repeat the question?
Fair enough. Here's the Q. Do you think government can extract a trillion dollars of new taxes from the economy, regardless of why or how it is extracted, without putting a significant drag on the economy, an economy that is as fragile as any since, arguably, the Great Depression?
|
|
guyman
Trad climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:29pm PT
|
Dirt.
2.5 % here, Tax somebody for using a tanning bed,it all starts adding up to 100%
Are you on the LA city council? They just reduced the TAX on internet businesses, from the huge increase imposed last year, to almost nothing.
Why?
Because the companies were leaving LA city in droves. A little tax increase here, a little there, no big deal, you say.
What's next?
Some board of "workers safety" wants to require condom use by all workers in the porn industry.
So Chatsworth is going to loose another industry to Nevada.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:29pm PT
|
"Do you think government can extract a trillion dollars of new taxes from the economy, regardless of why or how it is extracted, without putting a significant drag on the economy, an economy that is as fragile as any since, arguably, the Great Depression?"
I guess we're gonna find out. However, keep in mind that it is a Trillion over 10 years. For comparison sake, the US military budget is over $600 Billion per year (2009 budget is $680 B).
How these costs actually play out is anybody's guess right now, since the theoretic cost savings that were supposed to occur (i.e. Medicare trimming, efficiencies) are not politically palatable and may not happen.
It's arguably inarguable that if the status quo would have been every bit as destructive to this fragile economy.
Perhaps it's my day-after irrational exuberance, but I do have more optimism about the potential for this bill today. I'll try to enjoy that optimism while it lasts.
|
|
guyman
Trad climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:31pm PT
|
Fair enough. Here's the Q. Do you think government can extract a trillion dollars of new taxes from the economy, regardless of why or how it is extracted, without putting a significant drag on the economy, an economy that is as fragile as any since, arguably, the Great Depression?
No.
|
|
Binks
Social climber
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:31pm PT
|
I don't think funding neocon\Israeli agenda of conquest in Iraq, Afghanistan and propping up the Israeli welfare state is a good use for Trillions of US tax dollars. Could it be....socialism?
I paid about 50K in taxes for last year... I'd like to stop all payment for the above mentioned socialist wars and have some benefits in the USA.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:33pm PT
|
2.5 % here, Tax somebody for using a tanning bed,it all starts adding up to 100%
Guyman, c'mon we're a long way from that with this bill. It's not like it's a return to tax rates of the 1970's. Not even close. And for the benefit of helping 30,000,000 get insurance and saving thousands of lives each year?
Worth it.
Apogee, thanks for expanding on an answer to Gunsmoke.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:33pm PT
|
I guess we're gonna find out. However, keep in mind that it is a Trillion over 10 years. For comparison sake, the US military budget is over $600 Billion per year (2009 budget is $680 B).
Worth repeating.
|
|
guyman
Trad climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:35pm PT
|
Fat......."To provide for the common good" or something like that.
(heck... this ST topic goes so fast it's hard to keep up)
I think the government started the "county health care system" way back before the new deal. It was because Americans didn't wish to have dead sick dieing folks on the side of the roads. I mean no one wants to live in a sh#t hole like India?
Edit to "start making sense" ha ha ha
|
|
dktem
Trad climber
Temecula
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:42pm PT
|
2.5% is not a big deal.
There is no evidence supporting the "slippery slope" argument with regard to increasing tax rates for the wealthy.
The most fundamental evidence shows that tax rates of the wealthy have no impact on the economy. The top-bracket rates are much lower today than they have been in the past:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Income_taxes#History_of_top_rates.5B21.5D
There is a very strong correlation between economic prosperity in the US and high tax rates on the rich. As the link above shows, there were very high marginal tax rates in the 1950s and 1960s. Yeah I know -- correlation does not imply causation. But the rich have been taxed much more in the past than they are today. And the economy did just fine.
Tax rates move up and down. If you are going to use the slippery slope argument, remember it can go in either direction.
There is a lot of misinformation about taxes and tax rates out there:
http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/18/tea-party-ignorant-taxes-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:43pm PT
|
"Fair enough. Here's the Q. Do you think government can extract a trillion dollars of new taxes from the economy, regardless of why or how it is extracted, without putting a significant drag on the economy, an economy that is as fragile as any since, arguably, the Great Depression?"
How does one "extract" money from "the economy?" I'm really looking forward to the answer to this.
And as far as "slippery slope" on taxing the wealthy, people making 250k+ have gotten MASSIVE tax cuts in the last 10 years.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:45pm PT
|
Yes, let's revisit that comparison, and repeat it over and over:
The 2009 US Military budget is $680 Billion, which will be spent on bombs, wars, killing people, supporting endless defense contractors, and hopefully maintaining a few jobs and actually a little defense for the citizens.
This bill theoretically will cost $940 Trillion over ten years, which works out to $94 B/per year. Which is about 1/7th of the current military budget.
In that kind of light, I really don't have much of a problem spending that kind of $ on preserving the lives and well-being of the citizens. Hell, it would be easy to argue that doing so will provide far more protection and 'defense' than the US military.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:46pm PT
|
Fatty shouldn't you be off pretending that people being able to go to a primary care physician for $150 covered by insurance is worse than going to the emergency room for $1500 paid by shifting the costs to gov't, the insured and the rest of the healthcare system by charging $10 for an Advil?
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:51pm PT
|
To continue the military-healthcare comparison, there are supposedly 40,000 people who die every year presumably due to a lack of medical care and insurance. That's probably a hyperbolic overstatement by the left, but even if it's only 1/4 of that amount...
If 10,000 Americans died each year due to terrorism, would the country do anything about it? You betcha. Big time. If 100 people per year died due to terrorism, there'd be a massive military backlash.
Yessiree, this keeps sounding better and better.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:55pm PT
|
Well at least we're moving away from the "It's socialism!" argument.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2010 - 02:56pm PT
|
Apogee- The number is 45,000 and it is from what we hyperbolic liberals call a "study" done by people with "educations" referred to as "doctors." You can find it on this amazing socialist invention called "the internet" where information is redistributed from those with a lot of it to those with little.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=45000+die+annually+insurance
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!